The article makes no sense, but the headline made me laugh — “Republicans need to go negative.” Basically, the author thinks Republicans are not trying hard enough to explain to people that Obama is Bad.

Republican need to go MORE negative?
HOW THE FECK IS THAT EVEN POSSIBLE?

They’ve done everything but call him the “N-word!” And THAT was easy to read between the lines – or in their e-mails!

They’ve called him a Kenyan, a Socialist, a Fascist, a Communist, a Heathen, a Muslim. the Anti-Christ, an Atheist, and a Usurper.
What’s next?
A child-schtupper? No – too Catholic, and too religiously hierarchical.
A cannibal?

I’m confused…Is that commentary supposed to be serious or is it pure sarcasm? Judging by the comments above I would assume that people are taking it as seriously written,but by reading the commentary itself it just screams of sarcasm…What is it? I really can’t discern how it’s supposed to be understood..I’m inclined toward sarcasm.

I do believe it is physically impossible for the Rs to go “more negative.” They had money they could not physically spend during the last Presidential contest – they had saturated the airwaves with negativity and still couldn’t sway the voters!

I checked out the author Keith Koffler and found out that it wasn’t sarcasm I was detecting..it was complete sincerity. The guy is a full blown pure bred conservative wingnut writing with a childlike innocence. I’ve never encountered one of them before, normally their deceit and insincerity exposes them easily, but his guy threw me a curveball.

So this is doubling down. Appealing to the qaeda (that’s Arabic for “base”) but repugnant to the People. But the People have already spoken, and won’t speak again for another year or three, so the People have shut up, and only the qaeda counts. Besides, if negativity has zero effectiveness, then double negativity should be twice as effective!

Yes, I sometimes wonder whether Republican pundits and politicians just haven’t a clue, or whether they know they’re being dishonest; on the basis of this case I’ll go with the latter, tentatively. I’ve noticed some of the most apt characterizations of Republicans come from Republicans themselves. The writer says the President castigates Republicans “…as intolerant, heartless and petty ogres who live only to serve their masters in the top income tax bracket.” I haven’t heard these words from the President, but I couldn’t express better what I might like to hear him say. Of course, this is the only cogent (and sincerely felt?) thought in the whole piece. Compare with the talking points below for the usual drivel gushing from the lips of the ogre.